Ammoland.com, an online ammo sales outfit, details the D-party hacks who are taking their political machete to the 2A

I could go on, but suffice it to say that using the search term "democrats attack the second amendment", a rather narrow search, I got 546,000 hits. These four are from the first page, so rank very high to Mother Google.

Okay then, the case is made: as a political party, Democrats want to abolish the R2KBA in high numbers, only 12% off a plurality, and as for that 39%-pro-abolish crowd, only slightly more, 41% say they don't want to abolish the 2A. Now, I have some righty-friends, including those I have worked with in Law enforcement, who say "tut-tut" about this rising disdain for our basic right of self-defense (a God-given right at that). When pressed, the tut-tut folks say "it doesn't matter, the constitutional process for removing an Amendment is so strict that it will never be done". Yes, the tut-tutters are correct, it won't ever be done constitutionally. Following the strict letter and intent of our Constitution is not a required political process these days, and both major political parties constantly try to fudge the very obvious intent of constitutional powers of every sort.

The present campaign to present an Initiative, Initiative Petition 43, in Oregon is such an example of fudging. It creates a prohibited category of "assault weapon", then defines "assault weapon" to include every firearm capable of self-loading (long guns AND handguns) with the possible exception of un-modifiable internal-magazine weapons like the Garand Rifle and the Mauser C-96 "broomhandle" pistol. Their definition of "assault weapon" also takes in any weapon which can internally hold 10 or more rounds of ammo, so even your great-grandfather's pump-action .22 Gallery Gun is prohibited, as are most 22 leverguns. The Petition bans all weapons magazines holding more than 10 rounds anyway. This Petition, if approved and voted in this November, would ban well over half the firearms presently sold, and likely more than half of the firearms presently in the possession of Oregon's citizens. It makes possession of banned firearms a felony, so it would make instant felons out of over a million citizens if they didn't jump through the hoops to comply (divest themselves of the guns) on a very short time schedule after the laws became effective.

Initiative Petition 44 (illegal on it's face because of the MacDonald Decision in SCOTUS which abolished this idea), would force total lockdown of all firearms in most circumstances, and project automatic secondary and even tertiary civil liability onto firearms owners if their firearms are stolen and a police report isn't filed within 24 hours (no exceptions). There aren't criminal penalties with this one, but it's a liability lawyer's bonanza, and is illegal on it's face, since the Oregon Constitution would have to be changed to meet those new liability laws, which are illegal today. This petition attacks the R2KBA in the Chicago Style. We know about Chicago Style, don't we? Except for the term as applied to pizza crust, the very expression means illegal activity and rights denial.

These two Petitions for law-making are a continuation of the process of Oregon's Socialist Government which has recently banned person-to-person transfers of firearms (transfer through an FFL is now required) and the due-process-denying ERPO law which allows pissed-off relationship partners to disarm their former significant others.

We're not alone here in Oregon. The R2KBA is under attack everywhere. A new House Bill would bring a new, much more draconian Assault Weapons Ban to the entire nation. If the "blue wave" happens in November, this Bill will become law in the House of Representatives (spit!) Since any "blue wave" is more likely to change the party control in the Senate, the AWB could go to the President in January. Would he veto it? He says no now, but remember, he is a "deal maker". If the Asses offer him something he really wants in exchange for signing it, Trump will sign it.

Okay, the Asses are in full disarmament mode. They are in full Socialist mode, and the case can be made that they really want communism, not socialism. If the USA is forced to disarm like Australia did, we will have full-on socialism at the very least, and socialism at the point of a gun (communism definition) is more likely than not. This is not a pleasant choice to face, and at least 25% of Americans would oppose this political change. Most of that 25% would oppose it violently, and we would have a hum-dinger of a Civil War. Our choice is simple now: deny the Democrats' push for removing the 2A, or go to war.

Yes, it really is that simple. Our only choices now revolve around the threshold to start that Civil War. Do we wait until the Federal Storm Troopers begin to kick in doors to seize guns, or do we pre-emptively remove the socialism from our governance now, thereby ending the threat to our rights?

The 2A was written expressly for this purpose of removing a rights-trampling government. We are pre-authorized to fight, people. The Founders wanted us to fight in these circumstances.

This battle was never named, not even for the brooding Ben it was fought under, on the shores of a Loch with a name. There are no crosses, no monuments and no memories, the memories all died on that Field of Honor. A lesson remains, though: it’s about Honor and NOTHING else.